Vote for the best of the World War One battle rifle:


1903 Springfield in .30-06
1917 Enfield(American) in .30-06
British Enfield in .303
German Mauser in 7.92x57JS
Mosin-Nagant in 7.62x54R
French Chassepot

My bet is with the British Enfield in .303. it had a detachable magazine with a ten shot capacity. It has a smooth action with a short throw. The recoil is more manageable than the others.

Gee Jean, I wonder which one you voted for! :)

Gee Jean, I wonder which one you voted for! :)

Jim:

Of course that is my humble opinion. I'm sure that I will get all sorts of responses according to posters own experiences and knowledge.

Vote for the best of the World War One battle rifle:


1903 Springfield in .30-06
1917 Enfield(American) in .30-06
British Enfield in .303
German Mauser in 7.92x57JS
Mosin-Nagant in 7.62x54R
French Chassepot

My bet is with the British Enfield in .303. it had a detachable magazine with a ten shot capacity. It has a smooth action with a short throw. The recoil is more manageable than the others.

Key here is "battle rifle"...not target rifle, sporting rifle, dangerous game rifle, etc. 10 rounds and a bolt that can be operated smooth and fast.

Our Club used to shoot against the USMA Cadets every year,and met some military shooters.
I remember that I was told that the OldGuard"Brits could shoot accurately,just as fastas old"R A"Americans could with the M1 Garand.
I voted Mauser,but I admit thaat it was in error.
Frank

Most certainly the SMLE. After the Boer War the training plan and rifle clubs built quite a force of riflemen. Even Finn Aagaard wrote of being trained in rapid fire with the SMLE.
August 22 – 23 1914 the “Old Contemptibles” stopped the Germans in their advance across Belgium. Through the use of well disciplined musketry the British Expeditionary Force won World War I at Mons. Of course, it took the Germans four more long years to come to that realization. The battle of Mons was a pivotal battle and it was settled by an infantryman with a rifle in his hands.

I own both the SMLE and '03 Springfield, and can honestly tell you that while the bolt action on the Brit is sweet, the sights don't even compare to the Springfield, especially when equiped with USMC variants.

I gave the one vote (so far) for the Mosin-Nagant. My vote is based on both the time frame and conditions specified in the question - WWI

Vehicles were few and far between in WWI so where you went, you took the shoe leather express. The M-N 91/30 is a slim light rifle that doesn't wear you out marching off to fight. Muddy trenches means lots of crud getting into the weapon, again the 91/30 shines with its ease of cleaning and its bolt is nearly impossible to freeze shut. Shorter LOP means it's easier to handle when wearing bulky winter clothing. The added length gives a definite advantage when defending or taking a trench in a bayonet battle and while getting over/under barbwire fences that were so common in WWI.

'course the Mosin M91/30 only missed WWI by 12 years...


The problem with most considering the SMLE as the best rifle kinda stomps on the Brit's opinion. They obviously didn't consider it as the best solution, as it would have been replaced had the war not broken out when it did. The P-14/US M1917 was a superior design, and what the Brits wanted as a battel rifle, even though they had planeed to go to a 7mm caliber, and not stick with the .303.

'course the Mosin M91/30 only missed WWI by 12 years...


But the M91 and Dragoon did not! Both were converted to 91/30's. Same attributes that Mark speaks of. I do have to disagree that the P14 was superior the the MK3, better sights maybe, but that is all. If it were, than why did the Brits go with the No4Mk1, evolved from the basic Enfield line in later years?
I also believe that the 7mm cartridge was not a adopted because the British wanted to use the .303 cartridge. The logistical issues the new cartridge offered made it not feasible. That was for the P13 rifle. When converted or built to .303 it became the P14, but it still was a Mauser action and only carried 5 rounds.
All of these rifles have certain attributes that endear them to us, but when lead is flying..... Jim

WWI RIFLES were full length M91s. Dragoons filled about the same role as carbines.

The Brits stayed with the .303, and developed the No4 MkI for the same five reasons the US stayed with the .30/06 instead of converting to the .276...M-O-N-E-Y. Scrapping a few million expensive rifles, and replacing them with new isn't a good way to get elected during an economic depression. The PM would have had a "no confidence" vote faster than you could work a SMLE action!

Even if the Britts left the ammo as .303, the P-14 was built in the States, and they would have had to re-tool to build it, where the Mk 4 was just a small modification to the original tooling that was on hand. The U.S. stopped building the Pattern 14 in order to build P-17's for our troops, so there was no further supply from the U.S, nor was the tooling available from that source either. The original P-14"s actually were called P-13's and in 7-MM. They were converted to .303 and renamed Pattern 14's, in order to use existing ammo and not cause a problem by requiring 2 types of ammo in the field.

Charley,

Good catch on the technical typo! I'm so used to typing "91/30" it just came out when I should have stopped with just "91".

As "JP" said, I stand on my choice of rifle no matter if I made the typo or not.

Arguing caliber is a moot point for this discussion since there is no real difference between the 7.62x54R, .30-'06 and the .303 Brit - reference my reply under the "M1 vs M98" post as the 8x57 does have a slight ballistic advantage at longer ranges.

The "pattern" term simply ment a sealed (accepted) design. The P-13 was going to be adopted, as I said, and the P-13s were in a 7mm cartridge. A little thing like WWI stopped the adaptation of the P-13. the Brits were desperate for rifles, and modified the P-13 into the P-14, which, as pointed out, was in the standard .303.
Lots of production capacity in thye "neutral" US that's why the P-14s were manufactured here. P-14 production slowed down by 1916, as the Bri's were producing enough SMLEs. The US bought the tooling, and the modified M1917 was the result.

I am drifting off topic but I got to thinking about Herbert McBride and his comments on the Ross rifle in field service. This led to thinking about McBride’s experiences and his books: The Emma Gees and A Rifleman Went to War.
This is the Menin Gate outside of Ypres, Belgium. This monument was erected by the British to honor the 54,896 war dead from the Ypres area who have no known grave site. There are 159 British Military Cemeteries in Belgium where more than one million British Empire troops lie at rest.
No matter which rifle we prefer it was: “a well remembered fight.”

From an accuracy point of view, the Mauser (in all of its variants - including US) permits the best accuracty from all the rifles that served in WW I as its lugs lock to the front. The SMLE action is quicker but less accurate as its locking lugs are at the rear. At long ranges, the Brits were heavily punished by Mauser rifles in the Boer War. This led the Brits to adopt the p14 (.303) as a sniper rofle in both WW1 & 2 (although enfields were scoped as well).

From a reliability point of view the Mauser and SMLE are fairly evenly matched.

From a soldier's point of view in WW I conditions where most of the combat was at short ranges, the quicker action and larger magazine are what gives the SMLE action the edge. Also, the fact that the SMLE had a two piece stock was another advantage from a logistics point of view, as when they broke, it was easier and cheaper to replace them.

Hey, how come I dont see the Mannlicher as a choice for the best WW I rifle?

From an accuracy point of view, the Mauser (in all of its variants - including US) permits the best accuracty from all the rifles that served in WW I as its lugs lock to the front. The SMLE action is quicker but less accurate as its locking lugs are at the rear. At long ranges, the Brits were heavily punished by Mauser rifles in the Boer War. This led the Brits to adopt the p14 (.303) as a sniper rofle in both WW1 & 2 (although enfields were scoped as well).

From a reliability point of view the Mauser and SMLE are fairly evenly matched.

From a soldier's point of view in WW I conditions where most of the combat was at short ranges, the quicker action and larger magazine are what gives the SMLE action the edge. Also, the fact that the SMLE had a two piece stock was another advantage from a logistics point of view, as when they broke, it was easier and cheaper to replace them.

Hey, how come I dont see the Mannlicher as a choice for the best WW I rifle?

That is a total oversight on my part. I had a couple more spots on the survey but forgot the Mannlicher. Sorry about that.

jean48

An old saying -- the Germans had the best hunting rifle; the Americans had the best target rifle; the Brits had the best battle rifle.

An old saying -- the Germans had the best hunting rifle; the Americans had the best target rifle; the Brits had the best battle rifle.


Those words probably sum it up best. :)